Does the Holy Father mean that Our Lady has defects?

[Caanan]

While reading the text of the catechesis of the Holy Father 11 September 2013:

news.va/en/news/the-church-is-a-mother

I found myself rather disturbed by the implication of two statements of the first paragraph.

First premise (a wholly Catholic statement, in my view):

The Church and the Virgin Mary are mothers, both of them; what is said of the Church can be said also of Our Lady and what is said of Our Lady can also be said of the Church!

Second premise:

All mothers have defects, we all have defects, but when we speak of our mother’s defects we gloss over them, we love her as she is. And the Church also has her defects: but we love her just as a mother.

The conclusion would appear to be that the Holy Father is saying that Our Lady, like the Church, has defects. Would this not be a denial of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception (and others)?

I can’t imagine the Holy Father actually intends to say this, but logic would suggest otherwise.

Can anyone suggest a benign explanation, that does not contradict the teaching of the Church?

 

[QNDNNDQDCE]

I could think of several explanations.

(1) By defect, he does not mean some kind of sin or vice. Strictly speaking, a defect is just something someone lacks even if it has a negative connotation. To give a bad example, the Blessed Mother is deficient as a squirrel.

(2) When he is speaking of “all mothers,” he has in mind the expression “our mothers” from the previous sentence so the intended meaning is really “all our mothers.” Therefore, the statement that “all mothers have defects” does not encompass the Virgin Mary because he only had in mind the natural mothers of those present. Francis only says, “the Church also has her defects,” and not that the Church has defects because our mothers have defects and the Church, being our mother in the same sense, therefore also has defects.

(3) The Pope spoke imprecisely out of a lack of diligence and not because he meant to call any Marian doctrine into question.

 

[m134e5]

While reading the text of the catechesis of the Holy Father 11 September 2013:

news.va/en/news/the-church-is-a-mother

I found myself rather disturbed by the implication of two statements of the first paragraph.

First premise (a wholly Catholic statement, in my view):

Second premise:

The conclusion would appear to be that the Holy Father is saying that Our Lady, like the Church, has defects. Would this not be a denial of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception (and others)?

I can’t imagine the Holy Father actually intends to say this, but logic would suggest otherwise.

Can anyone suggest a benign explanation, that does not contradict the teaching of the Church?

From what it looks like to me, the Holy Father had moved on to another point when he was saying the Church has defects. He wasn’t talking about Mary anymore.

 

[Freekevio]

I am curious. Mary was a virgin when Jesus was implanted in her by the Holy Spirit but thereafter she did not remain a virgin and undoubtedly did sin as no one but Jesus is worthy to open the seal and no one but Jesus is without sin according to Scripture?

Why is her status so important to you?

 

[Sultan_Of_Swing]

I am curious. Mary was a virgin when Jesus was implanted in her by the Holy Spirit but thereafter she did not remain a virgin and undoubtedly did sin as no one but Jesus is worthy to open the seal and no one but Jesus is without sin according to Scripture?

Why is her status so important to you?

Her status is important to us, precisely because it was important to Jesus, and because it was important to the early Christians.

And where in scripture does it say “no one but Jesus is without sin”?

 

[Starrsmother]

While reading the text of the catechesis of the Holy Father 11 September 2013:

news.va/en/news/the-church-is-a-mother

I found myself rather disturbed by the implication of two statements of the first paragraph.

First premise (a wholly Catholic statement, in my view):

Second premise:

The conclusion would appear to be that the Holy Father is saying that Our Lady, like the Church, has defects. Would this not be a denial of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception (and others)?

I can’t imagine the Holy Father actually intends to say this, but logic would suggest otherwise.

Can anyone suggest a benign explanation, that does not contradict the teaching of the Church?

I love Pope Francis–he’s great, isn’t he? I just bet that some journalist is going to take him to task on this–wouldn’t we hate for every word we spoke to be under this kind of scrutiny? Poor Pope Francis!

But seriously, not being nearly as smart as the Pope, this is what occurs to me: Our Lady was human–so compared to God, that’s a defect, right? Also, Our Lady obviously felt pain—such as when she presented Jesus at the temple and the prophets came to her and told her that the baby she loved and had carried under heart was destined for a world of turmoil. Then there’s the finding in the Temple–Mary was obviously terrified as she looked for Him (as well as was Joseph I’m sure) and when she finally found Him, He told her that “He had to be about His Father’s work”. Period! (Can’t you just picture the conversation between Mary and Joseph as they hunted for Jesus–having had to turn around and walk who-knows-how-far back to Jerusalem, hoping that He wasn’t hurt or kidnapped or whatever all the way? Even Our Lady and St. Joseph must have been plenty unhappy! “I thought you had him!” “Why me–He was with you when we left town!” “Oh c’mon–He was with you last!”–LOL! Unless she had been given the full vision of Jesus’ life on earth and tradition kind of implies that she didn’t have that full understanding–but rather that she did have perfect faith–and going from the standpoint of being a mother myself— that must have made Mary just want to throw up her hands. I could go on–but could that possibly be what Pope Francis meant?

I honestly don’t know, but I will just bet that if the Pope said that, that we’ll be hearing about it on the news in the next few days along with all kinds of speculation just as when he bought that used car! (Again, I just LOVE Pope Francis!!!)

 

[JerryZ]

I am curious. Mary was a virgin when Jesus was implanted in her by the Holy Spirit but thereafter she did not remain a virgin and undoubtedly did sin as no one but Jesus is worthy to open the seal and no one but Jesus is without sin according to Scripture?

Why is her status so important to you?

Perhaps you can point out to some sources that back these assertions of your up.

Also in Revelation the one that can open the book needs to be WORTHY of doing so.
The book concerns man.

Even if Mary was sinless, she was not the one that could redeem us. A man, without sin needed to offer the sacrifice for the reparation for our sins. The sacrifice was his own life.
Jesus being fully man became worthy of opening the seal by shedding his blood willingly for us.

Revelation of John 5:2
And I saw a strong Angel, proclaiming with a great voice, “Who is worthy to open the book and to break its seals?”

 

[Warandpeace]

Her status is important to us, precisely because it was important to Jesus, and because it was important to the early Christians.

And where in scripture does it say “no one but Jesus is without sin”?

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, Romans 3:23

 

[JerryZ]

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, Romans 3:23

You are taking that quote out of the context.
St. Paul was not speaking of “all” = “All humans” as you imply because, Jesus is ALSO A human. This verse is used quite a lot by protestants to try to prove Mary sinned after giving birth to Jesus.
But that is illogical. She was preserved from original sin to be prepared as a pure vessel to bring forth the Son of God. She is called “full of grace” by the Arcangel.
Why would you think that she would sin afterwards?
She was in the presence of God for His 33 years He dwelled among us. If you search CAF for Romans 3:23 you will find all the threads that have been written about this.
Also the same verse has been brought up on the radio broadcast and have been responded to by just about all the apologists on staff.

 

[agnes_therese]

From what it looks like to me, the Holy Father had moved on to another point when he was saying the Church has defects. He wasn’t talking about Mary anymore.

I thought that was very clear.

 

[Mount_Carmel]

Was the Holy Father referring to the Church itself having defects, or was he alluding to humanity within the Church having defects? Didn’t Jesus when giving Peter the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven, in effect promise that the institution of the Church would be protected from imperfection - but that He did not promise the same regarding it’s membership?

Sorry to nit-pick, but there is an important difference.

 

[Starrsmother]

Was the Holy Father referring to the Church itself having defects, or was he alluding to humanity within the Church having defects? Didn’t Jesus when giving Peter the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven, in effect promise that the institution of the Church would be protected from imperfection - but that He did not promise the same regarding it’s membership?

Sorry to nit-pick, but there is an important difference.

I believe that Jesus’ words were “Thou art Peter–and upon this rock I will build my church. and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give thee the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatsoever thou shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” I don’t think perfect was mentioned. What was mentioned is that the church would not just fade away over time–that it would exist until the last day. He never promised perfection in any man–not even the men He put in charge of His church–He only promised that the church would remain forever…

 

[Freekevio]

Her status is important to us, precisely because it was important to Jesus, and because it was important to the early Christians.

And where in scripture does it say “no one but Jesus is without sin”?

In Hebrews 4, “We have a high priest who was tempted in every point like we are, yet without sin.”
In Romans 8 you have Paul very carefully saying in verses 3 and 4 that he came in the likeness of sinful flesh.
2 Corinthians 5:21 - Yes, he who knew no sin was counted as sin in order that we might become the righteousness of God. So he knew no sin.
Jesus challenges the Pharisees to accuse him and they cannot accuse him
Yes, “who can charge me of any sin?” to the Pharisees. And they’re not able to bring any charge against him.
Jesus was without sin. He needed to be a spotless lamb, and he was a spotless lamb.
In Hebrews we read that Jesus “has been tempted in every way, just as we are - yet was without sin” (Hebrews 4:15). He is also described as “a high priest [who] meets our need - one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens” (Hebrews 7:26) and is “unblemished” (Hebrews 9:14). Even Peter, who knew Jesus well, declared that he “committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth” (1 Peter 2:22). The apostle John tells us that “In him is no sin” (1 John 3:5) and Paul confirms for us that Jesus “had no sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21 above). Even Jesus himself asked those around him, “Can any of you prove me guilty of sin?” (John 8:46).
James 1:13 - Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
Hebrews 9:13 - How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
1 John 3:5 - And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.
1 Peter 1:19 - But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
Jesus Christ was the sacrificed Passover Lamb of God (Exodus 12:46 & John 19:32-33). The lamb had to be without blemish, which was analogous to being without sin, and was to have no bones broken (Exodus 12:46 & John 19:32-33). When the destroyer (angel of death) went through Egypt killing the firstborn of all the Egyptians, he looked upon the sides and tops of the doors of the Israelites. When he saw the blood of the sacrifice, he did not enter. Likewise, Christians are protected by the sacrificial blood of Jesus. Like the lamb, He was crucified on the Passover (John 18:28). After a sacrifice the Old Testament priests could not be touched until they delivered the blood of the lamb into the Holy of Holies into the presence of God. After His resurrection, Jesus Christ, like Old Testament high priests, could not be touched prior to taking the sacrifice (His blood) into the Heavenly Holy of Holies (John 20:17).
Jesus was uniquely sinless:
Romans 3:23 - For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God
Romans 3:10 - As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one – refers to humans not our Glorious Messiah.

 

[Warandpeace]

You are taking that quote out of the context.
St. Paul was not speaking of “all” = “All humans” as you imply because, Jesus is ALSO A human. This verse is used quite a lot by protestants to try to prove Mary sinned after giving birth to Jesus.
But that is illogical. She was preserved from original sin to be prepared as a pure vessel to bring forth the Son of God. She is called “full of grace” by the Arcangel.
Why would you think that she would sin afterwards?
She was in the presence of God for His 33 years He dwelled among us. If you search CAF for Romans 3:23 you will find all the threads that have been written about this.
Also the same verse has been brought up on the radio broadcast and have been responded to by just about all the apologists on staff.

I don’t think she sinned afterwards. This is a discussion; I feel no need to caveat everything.

 

[Dorothy]

I am curious. Mary was a virgin when Jesus was implanted in her by the Holy Spirit but thereafter she did not remain a virgin and undoubtedly did sin as no one but Jesus is worthy to open the seal and no one but Jesus is without sin according to Scripture?

Why is her status so important to you?

Mary is a perpetual virgin. The grammar used biblically (brothers and sisters) and (until) can be adequately refuted. (cousins or kin), and biblical grammar, used elsewhere in the bible.)

Catholics have a three-legged stool: Scripture, Authentic teaching (Magisterium), and Tradition with a capital “T”.

Other Christians have discarded two of those and have kept Scripture alone. A stool with one leg doesn’t stand up.

That has caused many misunderstandings, to say the least.

 

[eva77]

While reading the text of the catechesis of the Holy Father 11 September 2013:

news.va/en/news/the-church-is-a-mother

I found myself rather disturbed by the implication of two statements of the first paragraph.

First premise (a wholly Catholic statement, in my view):

Second premise:

The conclusion would appear to be that the Holy Father is saying that Our Lady, like the Church, has defects. Would this not be a denial of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception (and others)?

I can’t imagine the Holy Father actually intends to say this, but logic would suggest otherwise.

Can anyone suggest a benign explanation, that does not contradict the teaching of the Church?

I copied this from the link you provided…’‘The Church is like this: she bears us in the faith, through the work of the Holy Spirit who makes her fertile, like the Virgin Mary…’’
This answers your question, no the Pope isn’t saying that Our Lady is like the church in the terms of having defects, but that like Our Lady was made fertile by the Holy Spirit, so also the Church is made fertile by the Holy Spirit. It actually reinforces the church’s stand on Our Blessed Virgin Mary, being filled with Holy Spirit, who is God, even better that She bore Jesus Christ, who is God (double portions of The Trinity, WOW!!).

Also from the link…’‘The Church is not distinct from us ourselves, but should be seen as the totality of believers, like the “we” of Christians: I, you, we all are part of the Church. St Jerome wrote: “The Church of Christ is nothing other than the souls of those who believe in Christ” (Tract. Ps 86: PL 26,1084). Thus the motherhood of the Church is lived by us all, pastors and faithful. At times I feel: “I believe in God but not in the Church… I have felt that the Church says… priests say…”. But priests are one thing, but the church is not formed solely by priests, the Church is all of us!..’’
Yes, the church is not without defects, we are the church, me and you. And i don’t know about you, but although i do try, i’m not without defects. But because of the Holy Spirit who fertilizes the church, who in turn feeds us,and nurtures us,like a mother, we have hope that we can be saved so long as we believe. Becos faith is what we need to be a church,faith in that church.

I hope i made a little sense there. (apologies for typos, am using a phone!)

 

[TimothyH]

I am curious. Mary was a virgin when Jesus was implanted in her by the Holy Spirit but thereafter she did not remain a virgin and undoubtedly did sin as no one but Jesus is worthy to open the seal and no one but Jesus is without sin according to Scripture?

Why is her status so important to you?

Mary remained a virgin her whole life - before, during and after the birth of Jesus. Mary remained physically intact even after the birth of Jesus. That is why we acknowledge the “virgin birth.”

You are free to believe what you want but for Catholics, Mary “ever virgin” is dogma.

-Tim-

 

[TimothyH]

From what it looks like to me, the Holy Father had moved on to another point when he was saying the Church has defects. He wasn’t talking about Mary anymore.

That’s what it seems like to me from reading the text.

-Tim-

 

[Freekevio]

You are taking that quote out of the context.
St. Paul was not speaking of “all” = “All humans” as you imply because, Jesus is ALSO A human. This verse is used quite a lot by protestants to try to prove Mary sinned after giving birth to Jesus.
But that is illogical. She was preserved from original sin to be prepared as a pure vessel to bring forth the Son of God. She is called “full of grace” by the Arcangel.
Why would you think that she would sin afterwards?
She was in the presence of God for His 33 years He dwelled among us. If you search CAF for Romans 3:23 you will find all the threads that have been written about this.
Also the same verse has been brought up on the radio broadcast and have been responded to by just about all the apologists on staff.

Jesus WAS a man and a perfect Man at that but he was also Divine at the same time

 

[Freekevio]

Mary remained a virgin her whole life - before, during and after the birth of Jesus. Mary remained physically intact even after the birth of Jesus. That is why we acknowledge the “virgin birth.”

You are free to believe what you want but for Catholics, Mary “ever virgin” is dogma.

-Tim-

The question is not so much as to was she a virgin but was she sinless but even on the virginity issue this is questionable from these verses:
Here is Psalm 69:4-9, “Those who hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of my head; those who would destroy me are powerful, being wrongfully my enemies, what I did not steal, I then have to restore. 5O God, it is Thou who dost know my folly, and my wrongs are not hidden from Thee. 6May those who wait for Thee not be ashamed through me, O Lord God of hosts; May those who seek Thee not be dishonoured through me, O God of Israel, 7Because for Thy sake I have borne reproach; Dishonor has covered my face. 8I have become estranged from my brothers and an alien to my mother’s sons. 9For zeal for Thy house has consumed me, and the reproaches of those who reproach Thee have fallen on me.”

Matthew 12:46-47, "While He was still speaking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. And someone said to Him, “Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You.”

Matthew 13:55 - “Is not this the carpenters son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?”

After all she was only 16 when the Lord visited her.

and what about : Matthew 1:24-25 - “And Joseph arose from his sleep, and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took as his wife, and kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Jesus.”

Just asking- Shalom